RCS vs. Cotton made in Africa® – What’s the Difference?

Introduction: Two Standards with a Common Goal

Both the Regenerative Cotton Standard® (RCS) and Cotton made in Africa® (CmiA) were developed by the Aid by Trade Foundation (AbTF) to improve cotton production and create better livelihoods for smallholder farmers.

While they share a commitment to sustainability and social responsibility, they address different challenges and offer distinct benefits for brands. Understanding these differences is key for retailers and apparel companies when selecting the right sourcing strategy.

Overview of Cotton made in Africa®

Cotton made in Africa® (CmiA) was launched in 2005 and has become one of the leading standards for sustainable cotton from African countries south of the Sahara. Its primary goals are to:

• Protect the environment by avoiding genetically modified seeds and reducing pesticide use
• Improve working and living conditions for African smallholder farmers
• Create market access for sustainably grown African cotton
• Provide training in efficient farming practices and business skills
  

CmiA cotton is widely used in global fashion brands’ collections and is recognized for its focus on social impact and African farmer empowerment.

Overview of the Regenerative Cotton Standard® (RCS)

The Regenerative Cotton Standard® (RCS) takes a system-level approach to cotton production. It focuses on regenerative farming methods that restore ecosystems and improve farm resilience. Its objectives are to:

• Build soil health and increase biodiversity
• Strengthen the productivity and resilience of small-scale farms
• Improve the quality of life for farmers, their families, and animals
• Ensure full traceability through the Hard Identity Preserved (HIP) Chain of Custody
  

Unlike conventional sustainability standards, RCS measures positive outcomes such as soil carbon levels and ecosystem health rather than only controlling inputs.

Key Differences Between RCS and CmiA

Although both standards aim to improve cotton production, their scope and focus differ.

Aspect	Cotton made in Africa® (CmiA)	Regenerative Cotton Standard® (RCS)
Geographic Focus	African countries south of the Sahara	Global – farms worldwide
Farming Approach	Sustainable cotton production (focus on reducing harm)	Regenerative farming (focus on restoring and improving ecosystems)
Measurement	Compliance-based (inputs and practices monitored)	Outcome-based (soil health, biodiversity, carbon sequestration measured)
Traceability	Mass Balance chain of custody	Hard Identity Preserved (HIP) – batch-level traceability
Social Impact	Strong training and livelihood improvement programs	Integrated into regenerative systems, with focus on resilience and empowerment
Brand Messaging	Supports sustainable African cotton	Positions brand as regenerative, future-oriented and net-positive

Why Brands Might Choose One or Both

Some brands may choose to work with CmiA because of its strong social impact focus and African supply base, while others may prefer RCS for its regenerative farming approach and strict traceability.

In fact, the two standards can complement each other. Brands can use CmiA cotton to support African farmers and integrate RCS cotton for collections that highlight regeneration and measurable ecosystem restoration.

Benefits of Clarifying the Difference

Clearly communicating the distinction between RCS and CmiA is beneficial for brands because it:

• Helps consumers understand different sustainability claims
• Prevents confusion and greenwashing risks
• Allows targeted marketing campaigns for each collection
• Enables brands to report more accurately on ESG and SDG contributions
  

Conclusion: Two Standards, One Goal – Better Cotton

Both RCS and CmiA play crucial roles in driving sustainable transformation in cotton production. The choice between them depends on a brand’s sourcing strategy, target markets, and communication priorities.

By understanding the differences and synergies between the two, retailers and brands can make informed decisions and communicate their sustainability commitments with credibility and clarity.